↓ Skip to main content

A practical approach to dietary interventions for nondialysis-dependent CKD patients: the experience of a reference nephrology center in Brazil

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A practical approach to dietary interventions for nondialysis-dependent CKD patients: the experience of a reference nephrology center in Brazil
Published in
BMC Nephrology, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12882-016-0282-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lilian Cuppari, Fabiana Baggio Nerbass, Carla Maria Avesani, Maria Ayako Kamimura

Abstract

This paper describes the 30-year experience on nutritional management of non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients in a public outpatient clinic located in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. A team of specialized dietitians in renal nutrition is responsible to provide individual dietary counseling for patients on stages 3 to 5 of CKD. Two different types of nutrition care protocols are employed depending on the level of renal function. For patients with CKD stage 3 a simplified nutritional assessment is performed and the main dietary focus is on the control of protein intake particularly from animal sources. A more complete nutritional assessment as well as a detailed dietary plan focusing not only on the control of protein but also on energy supply and on specific micronutrients is provided for patients on stages 4 or 5 of CKD. Practical approaches and tools used by the dietitians in our clinic for improving patient´s adherence to protein, sodium and potassium restriction while maintaining a healthy diet are described in detail in the sections of the article.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 27%
Student > Master 8 15%
Student > Postgraduate 6 12%
Researcher 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 31%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 11 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,997,556
of 8,083,793 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#844
of 953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,149
of 257,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#39
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,083,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 953 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 257,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.